
Originally Posted by
eagle

Originally Posted by
Kel

Originally Posted by
eagle
Haha the Calzaghe fanboys are out in force!!!! The point is in 50 years time when people look back they
ll see that Kessler travelled to take on top opposition and Joe did not. Hence Keesler will get more respect if they have similiar records. Also not one of the Calzaghe fans disagreed with me when i said Kessler could easily have Calzaghes record if he fought S*** opposition in his home country like joe has done.....
In 50 years time nobody will be talking about either fighter.
Well lets change it to 20 years then, u still havent answered the question. Any fighter of decent skill with a title could fight 20 boxers that dont have near the talent of him at their home venue and have 20 wins.
S*** even Sven Ottke could and all i hear is how bad he was yet Joe is some kinda star for doing the same thing. 20 odd defenses against bums is not worth 5 against top guys. Even a close loss to a guy like Hopkins or Jones would have done more for Joes legacy than his wins aginst Manfredo and othe assorted bums.
This is the problem with guys like you. If you weren't around to watch the Ottke era I'm betting the first Calzaghe fight you saw was Lacy, right? So now you look at Joes record and see names like Eubank, Reid, Brewer, Mitchell, Woodhall etc, and because these names don't mean anything to you, you mistakenly believe them to be bums. When in fact it's clear to see Calzaghe has beaten plenty of world class fighters, and must be an exceptional talent to have remained unbeaten over such a length of time.
Fighting Hopkins and Jones would have been great. But you can't fight them if they're not willing to face you.
And in 50 years time no-one will give a flying F*** about where the fight took place just who WON!!!
Bookmarks